2010 (12) TMI 77

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... effect from 20.12.10.  The Doctors certificate does not indicate that the consultant is suffering from viral infection and undergoing medication for the same.  The same consultant has faxed similar adjournment letters from time to time in other cases also, a fact which is being taken judicial notice of.   The request for adjournment is bereft of bona fides and hence rejected.            2. I have examined the records and heard the ld. SDR. The respondent had received release orders for certain quantities of sugar in free sale quota for October-November, 2006.  They have showed the goods as sold in their records without actual sale.  The officers of Cent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....06) and the quantity of sugar which was sold in March, 2007.  Accordingly, the refund claim was allowed. 3.  The ld. SDR submits that the refund claim ought to have been dismissed as not maintainable inasmuch as the claimant had not challenged the self-assessment of November-December, 06.  In this connection, he refers to the High Courts judgment in Maharashtra Cylinders Pvt. Ltd. vs. CESTAT, Mumbai [2010 (259) ELT 369 (BOM)] wherein it was held that a refund claim was not to be considered in the absence of successful challenge to the self-assessment on the basis of which the duty was paid and, that this requirement was applicable to self-assessment also. The ld. SDR has also claimed support from Collector of Central Excis....